Objective of Project Work
This study is aimed at testing the feasibility of a Return on Investment (ROI) model within the organization so that the success of a training programme or a set of training programmes can be measured more accurately in monetary terms, thus enabling the management to understand the direct impact on the business bottom-line as a causal effect of the training imparted.
Return on investment (ROI) has become one of the most challenging and intriguing issues facing the human resources development (HRD) and performance improvement fields. With ROI, decision makers evaluate investments by comparing the magnitude and timing of expected gains to the magnitude and timing of investment costs. A good ROI means that investment returns compare favorably to investment costs. This study is aimed at testing the feasibility of a Return on Investment (ROI) model in the context of a training programme in Bharat oil, a government organization, to see whether the success of a training programme can be measured more accurately in monetary terms. It is meant to enable the management to understand the direct impact on the business bottom line as a causal effect of the training imparted and to decide whether to continue or discontinue the programmes. Bharat Oil conducted in-house training programmes in 2004 which included a blend of behavioral and functional training. The programmes conducted at this organization were evaluated using the most comprehensive evaluation models and discussed in terms of return on investment. The two programmes chosen for the study were: -The Threshold Programme and the Excellence in Project Management, each having 30 participants.
Bharat Oil conducts on an average approximately 2,000 training programmes per year which are conducted in-house, leveraging expert faculty from renowned institutes/organizations and well-trained business leaders from within the company. The training plan contains a variety of programmes which meet intrinsic needs of different functions. Some of the programmes are made mandatory at the corporate level such as ‘Vigilance Awareness Programme,’ ‘Communication & Presentation Skills,’ ‘Gender Sensitivity Programme,’ and ‘Security Sensitization’. However, majority of the Divisions carry out additional programmes based on ‘Here and Now Needs’ of the customer divisions such as ‘Safety and Hazardous Operations,’ ‘Safety Integrated Learning’, ‘Hydro treatment Processes for Middle Distillates,’ and ‘Treasury Management.’
· Align and integrate learning with the company’s business.
· Identify skill and competency gaps at all levels and create groups for delivering in-house trainings.
· Identify courses outside IOC/India and depute key employees handling new technology, practices or new business to attend these courses.
· Set up a world-class institute for creating critical mass of highly trained middle and senior level executives for occupying top level positions to the organization and the industry/nation.
· Set up a learning centre for training of marketing executives on customer-orientation, marketing of products and other marketing specific programmes.
· Organize cutting-edge training on quality, cost, attitude, and customer service and communication network.
· Conduct brain-storming sessions with the key executives, senior and middle management groups, un-ions and working levels, for deciding strategies for the changed scenario and involvement of employees.
· Organize regular interaction with top management for deliberations on specific issues in an organized way.
· Impart training to senior top managers in advance technologies and latest managerial tools and techniques for maintaining cutting edge of the organization and developing leaders with all-round qualities.
· Have multi-pronged communication about the imminent competition across the organization on a regular basis and Enterprise Resource Planning So-lutions and related training.
· Focus on quality, ISO Certification/accreditation, adoption of Business Excellence Model by strategic business units and benchmarking with national/international training providers.
· Train critical position holders extensively in India and abroad to handle business ambiguities and complexities and gear up for the new business outside India.
· Develop in-house Petroleum based international MBA programme with in-built foreign module to create a global mindset and entrepreneurial qualities among executives.
· Depute sizable number of executives for MBA courses in other Institutes of India for creating a mix of executives with general MBA and petroleum-based MBA.
· Conduct Management Development Training Programmes in niche business schools in India and abroad for understanding global business trends.
· Make a paradigm shift from ‘Supply and Distribution’ to ‘Marketing Strategies and CRM’
· Train Executives for business integration, diversification, and entering into joint ventures and handling newly acquired companies.
· Be a learning organization, and inculcate skills and competencies required for becoming a transnational, integrated energy company and for value creation for the stakeholders.
· Develop employees by enhancing their knowledge, skills, and competencies in functional areas – general, strategic management, and advanced functional management, in line with the business of the company.
· Provide post-experience management education for renewal of executives to global standards.
· Achieve and sustain customer respect through world-class products and services.
· Sustain learning environment through creativity, competence, and recognition of contribution.
This study is aimed at testing the feasibility of a Return on Investment (ROI) model within the organization so that the success of a training programme or a set of training programmes can be measured more accurately in monetary terms, thus enabling the management to understand the direct impact on the business bottom-line as a causal effect of the training imparted.
The effects of behavioral and functional training imparted to the employees have been coined as independent variable. Bharat Oil used training as a major tool to change the attitude sets and skill levels of its employees. It conducted 2,434 in-house training programmes which included a blend of behavioral and functional training. The training was intended to develop employees by enhancing their knowledge, skills, and competencies in functional areas/general/strategic management and advanced functional management, in line with the business of the company.
Change in the attitude sets and of the employees and direct impact on the business bottom-line have been considered as dependent variable in the present study. It includes change in knowledge, skills, and competencies enhancement in functional areas as well as change in attitude and the behavioral aspects of the employees.
The two programmes chosen for the study were:
1. Threshold Programme (30 Participants)
2. Excellence in Project Management Programme (30 Participants)
This particular programme was chosen for the purpose of ROI calculation since this is one of Indian Oil’s most elite programmes. The programme has been designed to enhance the general management skills of senior man-agers of the company and to help them acquire a comprehensive strategic perspective so that they are prepared to lead the organization with confidence to meet the emerging challenges. This is the programme where the best of the best are trained to enable them to cross over from middle management into the rungs of top management.
Excellence in Project Management Programme
Due to the increased investment envisaged by the corporation to meet the current challenges in technological, environmental, and customer expectations in terms of quality in delivery, the Excellence in Project Management Programme becomes one of the most vital ingredients in the recipe for success.
Collecting Post-Programme Data
The questionnaires for “Threshold Programme Evaluation” and “Excellence in Project Management Programme” have been implemented to ascertain the degree of success in meeting the objectives of the training programme at Bharat Oil.
Converting Data into Monetary Benefits
Several methods such as calculating the cost of quality, using historical costs, and internal and external experts’ inputs and converting employee time could have been used but due to lack of time and data, the method chosen for this study was to use the estimates from participants. In some situations, programme participants are capable of estimating the value of a soft data improvement. This method seems appropriate when participants are capable of providing estimates of the cost (or value) of the unit of measure improved by applying the skills learned in the programme. The advantage of this approach is that the individuals closest to the improvements are also often the ones most capable of providing the most reliable estimates of its values.
Why Measure ROI of a Training Programme
Several issues are driving the increased interest in, and application of, the ROI process, the most common being:
· the pressure from clients and senior managers which show that the return on their training investment is probably the most influential drive
· the competitive economic pressures that are causing intense scrutiny of all expenditures
· the general trend towards accountability with all staff support groups that is causing some HRD departments to measure their contribution
· to justify the existence of the training department by showing how it contributes to the organization’s objectives and goals
· to decide whether to continue or discontinue the training programmes.
Measures Contribution – ROI makes it possible for the HRD staff to know the specific contribution from a select number of programmes. It can determine if the benefits of the programme, expressed in monetary terms, have outweighed the costs and thus whether it has made a contribution and is actually a good investment or not.
Sets Priorities – By calculating ROIs in different areas, one can determine which programmes contribute the most to the organization, allowing priorities to be established for high-impact training.
Focuses on Results – Measurement of ROI is a result-based process which brings a focus on results with all programmes. The process requires instructional design-ers, facilitators, participants, and support groups to concentrate on measurable objectives – what the programme is attempting to accomplish. Thus, the process has the added benefit of improving the effectiveness of all the training programmes.
Alters Management Perceptions of Training – The ROI process, when applied consistently and comprehensively, can convince the management group that training is an investment and not an expense. Managers will see training as making a viable contribution to their objectives, thus increasing the respect for the function. This is an important step in building partnership with management.
The evaluation levels categorize data, reporting a chain of impact as reaction leads to learning, to application, to impact, and to return on investment.
| ROI Evaluation Level | Measurement Focus |
1. | Reaction & Planned Action | Measures participant satisfaction with the programme and captures planned actions |
2. | Learning | Measures changes in knowledge, skills, and attitudes |
3. | Application and Implementation | Measures changes in on-the-job behavior and progress with application |
4. | Business Impact | Captures changes in business impact measures |
5. | Return on Investment | Compares programme monetary benefits to the programme costs. |
Most of the data relating to programme costs was avail-able from the Project Completion Reports of the programmes. The only additional cost which has been included is the cost of participants’ time which had not been previously taken into account. This element has been considered while trying to estimate programme costs because this represents the time that the participants have spent attending the programme which they would have otherwise spent at the workplace. The CTC (cost to company) of the participants represent an expense that should be included. For situations where the programme has been conducted, these costs can be estimated using average or midpoint values for salaries in typical job classifications (Tables 1 and 2).
Table1: Costs Considered in the Excellence in Project Management Programme at Indian Oil
No. | Cost Element | Consolidated Amount (Rs.) |
1 | Faculty honorarium | 19,200 |
2 | Stay @ Rs. 1,500 per day/participant | 1,68,000 |
3 | Catering @ Rs. 125 per day/participant | 14,875 |
4 | Photocopying, stationary and brochure | 27,500 |
5 | Air and local travel | 34,755 |
6 | Photography and books | 3,850 |
7 | Cost of participants’ time @ Rs. 8,000 | 2,40,000 |
| per participant (assumed average CTC) |
|
| Total | 5,08,180 |
Table2: Costs Considered in the Threshold Programme at Indian Oil
No. | Cost Element | Amount (Rs.) | Consolidated Amount (Rs.) | |
1 | Faculty Honorarium: |
|
| |
|
| Vedanta | 7,500 |
|
|
| Thomas Intl. | 29,160 |
|
|
| APTECH | 12,900 |
|
|
| Comp. Update | 20,000 |
|
|
| IIM-A | 11,98,800 | 12,68,360 |
| 2 | Stay @ Rs. 1,500/- per day/participant for 22 SMs/CMs and @ | 8,01,600 | |
|
| Rs. 2,400/- for 8 DGMs for 28 days |
| |
| 3 | Catering @ Rs. 125/- per day/participant for 30 persons for 28 days | 1,05,000 | |
| 4 | Photocopying | 43,000 | |
| 5 | Stationary incl. Ties and Bags | 18,220 | |
| 6 | Air Travel and Local Travel (If borne by IIPM) | 5,000 | |
| 7 | Others: (Foreign Module) |
| |
| Air Fare @ Rs. 35,726 for 31 people | 11,07,506 |
| |
| Visa + Ins. @ Rs. 2,700 for 31 people | 8,37,000 |
| |
| Foreign Allowance (27 people + 1 coordinator) | 24,14,250 | 43,58,756 | |
8 | Cost of participants’ time @ Rs. 90,000 per participant (assumed average CTC) |
| 27,00,000 | |
|
|
| 92,999,36 | |
Source: HR (Dept.), Indian Oil | ||||
The return has been calculated in three different ways:
One of the earliest methods for evaluating training investments is the benefits/costs ratio (BCR). This method compares the benefits of the programme to the costs in a ratio.
BCR = Programme Benefits / Programme Costs
In simple terms, BCR compares the annual economic benefits of the programme to the costs of the programme. A BCR of one means that the benefits equal the costs. A BCR of two, usually written as 2:1, indicates that for each rupee spent on the programme, two rupees were returned as benefits.
Perhaps the most appropriate formula for evaluating training investments is net programme benefits divided by cost. The ratio is usually expressed as percentage when the fractional values are multiplied by 100. ROI can thus be expressed as:
ROI (%) = [(Programme Benefits — Programme Costs) / Programme Costs] x 100
The ROI value is related to the BCR by a factor of one. This means, for example, that a BCR of 2.56 is the same as an ROI value of 156 per cent. An ROI on a training investment of 60 per cent means that an additional 60 per cent of the costs are reported as ‘earnings’. An ROI on training investment of 150 per cent indicates that the costs have been recovered and an additional 1.5 multiplied by the costs is captured as ‘earnings’.
The payback period is a common method for evaluating capital expenditures. With this approach, the annual cash proceeds (savings) produced by the investment are equated to the original cash outlay required by the investment to arrive at some multiple of cash proceeds equal to the original investment. Measurement is usually in term of years or months.
Payback Period = Total Investment / Annual Savings
Return Calculation on The Threshold Programme
1) Benefits/Costs Ratio BCR = Programme Benefits / Programme Costs = 32, 50,000 / 15, 49,989 = 2.097
2) ROI (%) = [(Programme Benefits — Programme Costs) / Programme Costs ] x 100
= [(32, 50,000 – 15,49,989) / 15,49,989] x 100 = 109.68%
3) Payback Period = Total Investment / Annual Savings
= 15,49,989 / 17,00,011 = 0.91 years or 11 months (approx)
Return Calculation on Excellence in Project Management Programme
1) Benefits/Costs Ratio
BCR = Programme Benefits / Programme Costs
9, 87,750 / 1,86,333 = 5.3
2) ROI (%) = [(Programme Benefits — Programme Costs) / Programme Costs ] x 100
[ (9,87,750 – 1,86,333) / 1,86,333] x 100 = 430% (approx)
3) Payback Period = Total Investment / Annual Savings
= 1,86,333 / 8,01,417
= 0.23 years or 3 months (approx)
The calculations are based on a series of impact questions. Five adjustments are made to ensure that the data is credible and accurate:
1) The participants who do not complete the questionnaire or provide usable data on the impact questions are assumed to have made no improvement.
2) Extreme and unrealistic data have been omitted.
3) Only annualized values are used as requested in the responses.
4) The values are adjusted to reflect the confidence level of participants.
5) The values are adjusted for the amount of the improvement related directly to the programme.
These five adjustments create a very credible value that is usually considered to be an understatement of the benefits accrued due to the training imparted. Tables 3 and 4 give the estimates of training impact from participants in the different programmes.
Table3: Estimates of Training Impact from Participants in the Threshold Programme
Participant | Improvement (Rs.) | Basis | Confidence Level (%) | Isolated Effect %age | Conservative Integration (Rs.) |
1 | 30,00,000 | Better decision making | 30 | 50 | 4,50,000 |
2 | 25,00,000 | Efficient management | 60 | 40 | 6,00,000 |
3 | 20,00,000 | Quick and accurate decisions | 40 | 80 | 6,40,000 |
4 | 40,00,000 | Efficient handling of situations and | 30 | 70 | 8,40,000 |
|
| increased teamwork within department |
|
|
|
5 | 30,00,000 | Good decisions | 60 | 40 | 7,20,000 |
|
| Total Benefits |
|
| 32,50,000 |
Table4: Estimates of Training Impact from Participants in Excellence in Project Management Programme
Participant | Improvement (Rs.) | Basis | Confidence Level (%) | Isolated Effect %age | Conservative Integration (Rs.) |
1 | 1,60,000 | Additional Sales | 90 | 50 | 72,000 |
2 | 3,00,000 | Decreased time overruns | 60 | 50 | 90,000 |
3 | 3,00,000 | Reduced cost of rework | 70 | 60 | 1,26,000 |
4 | 2,00,000 | Minimizing startup hiccups | 50 | 50 | 50,000 |
5 | 2,75,000 | Reduced maintenance problems | 60 | 40 | 66,000 |
6 | 3,00,000 | Increased site effectiveness | 70 | 50 | 1,05,000 |
7 | 4,00,000 | Reduced maintenance problems | 80 | 40 | 1,28,000 |
8 | 2,00,000 | Reduced project time | 70 | 50 | 70,000 |
9 | 3,50,000 | Reduced on-site problems | 85 | 50 | 1,48,750 |
10 | 1,40,000 | Efficient time and labour management | 50 | 60 | 42,000 |
11 | 1,50,000 | Under budget | 100 | 60 | 90,000 |
|
| Total Improvement |
|
| 9,87,750 |
The method chosen to isolate the impact of training is meant to obtain information directly from the programme participants. The effectiveness of this approach rests on the assumption that participants are capable of determining or estimating how much of a performance improvement is related to the training programme. This is one of the major methodological limitations of such studies. Erroneous, incomplete, and extreme information could have distorted the analysis. While calculating ROI through this method, the participants should know how much of the change was caused by applying their learning from the programme.
Apart from this, the following limitations have been figured out in the present study:
1) The exact figure for cost of participants’ time was not available. Hence there is a possibility that the estimations made are not accurate.
2) Suitable responses from all the participants were not available. This means that the effectiveness of both training programmes taken into consideration has been an extrapolation of the responses, which were made available. The assumption here is that similar benefits would have accrued from the participants who did not make their response available.
3) There was no possibility of even experimenting with the control groups since the project commenced post training.
4) The participants of both the programmes were posted all over the country, making distance a barrier for conducting in-depth interviews.
The presence of participants across the nation also made it difficult to obtain post-training data from more than one source, i.e., the participants themselves. This was a unique problem that was uncovered particularly with the Threshold Programme participants. Since they primarily occupy high leadership positions, they do not have any activity within their purview which directly impacts the bottom line of the organization. It is generally their ability to handle the employees, who directly boost the bottom line well, which is their real contribution. This indirect effect makes quantifying the benefits derived due to training rather difficult.
Recommendations and Implications
If appropriate and feasible, participants should receive prior communication about the requirement for a follow up questionnaire. This minimizes some of the resistance to the process, provides an opportunity to explain in some more detail the circumstances surrounding the evaluation, and positions the follow-up evaluation as an integral part of the programme – not as an add-on activity that someone initiated three months after the programme.
Management involvement at the local level might prove critical to the response rate success. Managers can distribute the questionnaires themselves, make reference to the questionnaire at staff meetings, follow up to see if the questionnaire has been completed and generally show the support for completing the questionnaire. This direct supervisor support might cause some participants to respond with usable data.
Even if it is an abbreviated form, participants should see the results of their study. More importantly, participants must understand that they will receive a copy of the study when they are asked to provide the data. This promise might increase the response rate, as some individuals want to see the results of the entire group along with their particular input.
It is difficult to evaluate an entire HRD function such as management development, career development, executive education or technical training within the ROI umbrella. ROI is more effective when applied to one programme that can be linked to a direct payoff.
For this reason, ROI evaluation must be a micro-level activity that will usually focus on a single programme or a few tightly integrated programmes. This decision to evaluate several programmes or just one programme should include consideration of the objectives and timing of the programme. Attempting to evaluate a group of programmes conducted over a long period becomes quite difficult. The cause and effect relationship becomes more confusing and complex.
Incentives might be used to obtain a greater response results from the participants. For example, one might pin a ten rupee note to the questionnaire and add a heading on the questionnaire which states “Please fill out this form over a cup of coffee”. Another incentive might be to send a pen along with the questionnaire along with a note which states “Kindly use this pen to fill out the form”. These methods have been known to boost response rates.
Any organization wanting to improve systems, procedures, or even attitudes must plan accordingly. This planning must be integrated and aligned with the business. The effort to use training as a tool to help balance an organization in a dynamic environment must be continuous.
There must be constant matching of individual and organizational needs in a system which is biased towards neither. Once this matching is completed and training programmes carried out, it is then not only important to evaluate the training but to realize how much it has boosted the bottom line. Here is where the ROI comes to the fore possibly on helping management realize that training is truly an investment and not an expense.
Training can no more be a mundane task which exists because it always has. It is now strategically imperative that training be conducted with the clear understanding that if people are truly the organization’s greatest asset, then training is beyond doubt, the greatest investment and must hence be utilized wisely.
By evaluating training programmes with the ROI in mind, training functions can be perceived in a more credible light. Programmes aligned with organization strategy are offered, while others that add little value are redesigned and sometimes eliminated. With proper planning around a proven framework, realistic evaluation targets, and shared responsibilities for major steps, the ROI process can be implemented in a cost-effective, systemic manner and can assist the resource-constrained training function to present their work in terms of financial benefits that leaders understand and have come to expect. Specifically, part one of this ROI series emphasized the following cost-savings approaches:
1. Plan for evaluation early in the process
2. Build evaluation into the training process
3. Share the responsibilities for evaluation
4. Require participants to conduct major steps
5. Use short-cut methods for major steps.
Part two will continue to describe practical application of five additional cost-saving approaches to ROI implementation:
6. Use sampling to select the most appropriate programmes for ROI analysis
7. Use estimates in the collection and analysis of data
8. Develop internal capability
9. Streamline reporting
10. Utilize technology.
Annexure 1: Questionnaires for Programme Evaluation
‘Threshold’ Programme Evaluation
1. Listed below are the objectives of the ‘Threshold’ programme. After reflecting on the programme, please indicate the degree of success in meeting the objectives:
As a result of this Programme, participants will be able to: | Failed | Limited Success | Generally Successful | Completely Successful |
|
|
|
|
|
a. Develop a general management orientation through highlighting the inter-linkages across decisions in functional area |
|
|
|
|
b. Strengthen the understanding of key issues and challenges in strategy formulation and implementation |
|
|
|
|
c. Enhance the awareness about the threats, constraints and opportunities that have arisen from operating in increasingly deregulated product, services and resource markets |
|
|
|
|
d. Sensitize the participants to the need to create value through appropriate corporate actions for long-term survival and growth of the organization |
|
|
|
|
2. Please rate on a scale of 1-5, the relevance of each of the Programme elements to your job by indicating (1) not relevant and (5) very relevant
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
a. Interactive Activities |
|
|
|
|
|
b. Group Discussions |
|
|
|
|
|
c. Networking Opportunities |
|
|
|
|
|
d. Reading Materials / Video |
|
|
|
|
|
e. Programme Content |
|
|
|
|
|
3. Please indicate the degree to which your use of the following actions was enhanced as a result of your participation in the training Programme:
| No Change | Little Change | Some Change | Significant Change | Momentous Change | No Opportunity to use Skills |
a. Taking decisions with a sound analysis of the same |
|
|
|
|
|
|
b. Making the unit/department more market-oriented |
|
|
|
|
|
|
c. Focusing on customer analysis and customer value |
|
|
|
|
|
|
d. Effectively using the information technology within the organization |
|
|
|
|
|
|
e. Understanding and managing co-workers and superiors |
|
|
|
|
|
|
f. Effectively measuring and managing risk |
|
|
|
|
|
|
g. Engaging in vertical integration, diversification and/or mergers and acquisitions |
|
|
|
|
|
|
h. Ability to envision for your organization |
|
|
|
|
|
|
i. Enhancing your leadership traits |
|
|
|
|
|
|
j. Better handling the competition faced by your company |
|
|
|
|
|
|
4. Please identify any specific accomplishments that you can link to this training Programme)? What specific suggestions do you have for improving the Programme? (on time schedules, project completion, response times, etc)
5. What specific value in Indian Rupees can be attributed to the above accomplishments/ improvements (use first year values only)? While this is a difficult question, try to think of specific ways in which the above improvements can be converted into monetary units. Please indicate the basis for your calculation.
6) | What level of confidence do you place on the above estimations? |
|
| (0% = No Confidence, 100% = Certainty) |
|
7) | Other factors generally tend to affect performance as well. Please indicate the |
|
| percent of the above improvements that is related directly to this programme. |
|
8. Indicate the extent to which you think this programme has influenced each of these measures in your work unit, department or business unit:
| No Influence | Some Influence | Moderate Influence | Significant Influence | Momentous Influence |
a.Productivity |
|
|
|
|
|
b. Customer Response time |
|
|
|
|
|
c. Cost Control |
|
|
|
|
|
d. Employee Satisfaction |
|
|
|
|
|
e. Customer Satisfaction |
|
|
|
|
|
f. Quality |
|
|
|
|
|
g. Other |
|
|
|
|
|
9. What barriers, if any, have you encountered that have prevented you from using skills or knowledge gained in this Programme?
10) What specific suggestions do you have for improving the Programme?
Questionnaire on ‘Excellence in Project Management’ Programme Evaluation
1. Listed below are the objectives of the ‘Excellence in Project Management’ programme. After reflecting on the programme, please indicate the degree of success in meeting the objectives:
As a result of this Programme, participants will be able to: | Failed | Limited Success | Generally Successful | Completely Successful |
|
|
|
|
|
a. Grasp the concepts of Project Management in the current scenario |
|
|
|
|
b. Grasp the latest trends in Project Management for optimum utilization of resources available for the projects |
|
|
|
|
c. Reduce the execution time by using modern construction equipment |
|
|
|
|
d. Identify key factors for improvement in time, cost and quality of projects |
|
|
|
|
2. Please rate on a scale of 1-5, the relevance of each of the Programme elements to your job by indicating (1) not relevant and (5) very relevant
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
a. Interactive Activities |
|
|
|
|
|
b. Group Discussions |
|
|
|
|
|
c. Networking Opportunities |
|
|
|
|
|
d. Reading Materials / Video |
|
|
|
|
|
e. Programme Content |
|
|
|
|
|
3. Please indicate the degree to which your use of the following actions was enhanced as a result of your participation in the training Programme:
| No Change | Little Change | Some Change | Significant Change | Momentous Change | No Opportunity to use Skills |
a. Minimizing the non-contributing actions per project |
|
|
|
|
|
|
b. Arranging the site for maximum effectiveness |
|
|
|
|
|
|
c. Assigning appropriate work for involved employees |
|
|
|
|
|
|
d. Dealing with problems on site |
|
|
|
|
|
|
e. Keeping the project members focused |
|
|
|
|
|
|
f. Accomplishing project objectives |
|
|
|
|
|
|
g. Evaluating the project |
|
|
|
|
|
|
h. Implementing action plan |
|
|
|
|
|
|
i. Planning a follow-up activity |
|
|
|
|
|
|
j. Better handling the competition faced by your company |
|
|
|
|
|
|
4. Please identify any specific accomplishments that you can link to this training Programme)? What specific suggestions do you have for improving the Programme? (on time schedules, project completion, response times, etc)
5. What specific value in Indian Rupees can be attributed to the above accomplishments/ improvements (use first year values only)? While this is a difficult question, try to think of specific ways in which the above improvements can be converted into monetary units. Please indicate the basis for your calculation.
6) | What level of confidence do you place on the above estimations? |
|
| (0% = No Confidence, 100% = Certainty) |
|
7) | Other factors generally tend to affect performance as well. Please indicate the |
|
| percent of the above improvements that is related directly to this programme. |
|
8. Indicate the extent to which you think this programme has influenced each of these measures in your work unit, department or business unit:
| No Influence | Some Influence | Moderate Influence | Significant Influence | Momentous Influence |
a.Productivity |
|
|
|
|
|
b. Customer Response time |
|
|
|
|
|
c. Cost Control |
|
|
|
|
|
d. Employee Satisfaction |
|
|
|
|
|
e. Customer Satisfaction |
|
|
|
|
|
f. Quality |
|
|
|
|
|
g. Other |
|
|
|
|
|
9. What barriers, if any, have you encountered that have prevented you from using skills or knowledge gained in this Programme?
10) What specific suggestions do you have for improving the Programme?
